MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415621034 · doi:10.1111/cogs.70129

From Human Child to Grey Parrot: Exploring a Common Model of Word Meaning Extension Across Species

2025· article· en· W4415621034 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michal Fishkin, Shereen Chang, Yang Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCategorization, perception, and language
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMeaning (existential)Extension (predicate logic)Word (group theory)Probabilistic logicCognitionTest (biology)Process (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Word meaning extension refers to the process by which a single word form develops multiple related meanings. Prior studies demonstrate that meaning extension at diverse timescales, from decades-long historical change and to month-long changes in child overextension, is accounted for by models grounded in conceptual relations across knowledge types. Whether this framework generalizes to other species remains an open question. We address this question with a probabilistic model of overextension based on various knowledge types to predict word choice of nonhuman animals. As a starting point, we compared cases of overextension from Apollo - a grey parrot who has acquired some English words - to the cases of overextension documented in child language acquisition. We apply an established model of child overextension to a novel parrot dataset of over 200 referent-utterance pairs (e.g., bead-"ball") collected from Apollo's YouTube channel and test whether the child model can predict parrot word choice. Our results show that Apollo's overextension can be predicted by the multimodal model of child overextension better than baseline models that rely on frequency or sound similarity. We also find independent evidence supporting the role of different knowledge types from Alex, a grey parrot, who features prominently in prior research on animal acquisition of human language. Our findings suggest that a common model might account for the cognitive ability of word overextension identifiable in a species that diverged from humans about 320 million years ago. We discuss potential limitations and future research directions that may further strengthen the current findings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCognitive ScienceSame topicCategorization, perception, and languageFrench-language works237,207